Is this Lamia hemidrachm a match to an old auction plate?

[Pharsalos]

I have this Lamia hemidrachm, ex BCD and a 1985 Poinsignon sale (Robert Heitz collection):

Lamia, Thessaly
400 - 375 BCE
AR Hemidrachm
Size: 14 mm, Weight: 2.76 grams, Die axis: 1h

Forvm member Curtis recently published some links to new catalogue listings on Archives (thank you Curtis!), and one of them was Otto Helbing Auction 59 from 31 January 1930: https://archive.org/details/helbing-otto-1930-01-31-griechen-romer-barbaren/page/n58/mode/1up

Lot 226 is a hemidrachm of Lamia. The scan is a little blurry, but possibly it is a match to my coin. I am not certain though, because while the description and dies match, the lack of detail in the plate image gives me caution. The right amphora arm is different, though that could be just the plaster cast smudged.

I would appreciate other’s opinions. If someone happens to know of another copy of the plate (with hopefully a clearer image) that would be fantastic.

[djmacdo]

Similar too but not the same coin.

[Kevin D]

If it were my coin, I would keep looking for a better auction catalog image, as it looks to me there is a chance it is the same coin.

On the obverse of your coin, there are contact marks seen on the cheek/jaw line to the left of the mouth. There are similar looking features in the blurry catalog image.

Unfortunately, I did not find a PDF copy of this catalog on the Heidelberg website.

Edit: I've seen reported weights for the same coin vary in different catalogs by a small amount, usually not more than a few hundredths of a gram.

[marylannin]

Here are two additional scans of the Helbing auction, courtesy of a friend and fellow collector.

M

[marylannin]

I believe it is the same coin. The defect at the bottom of the neck identical.

M

[Pharsalos]

They are much better images! Thank you so much Ms Lannin for taking the time to post them, and thank you kindly to your friend as well.

I am also more confident it is the same coin based on the obverse defects. With the clearer reverse images, details that looked like they could be different now don’t, or can be explained by the plaster cast.

[Kevin D]

Nice how the better images cleared up the right amphora handle. I think very likely it is the same coin.

[Virgil H]

They certainly look like the same coin, but what do you think about the E ? Very close, but  seems a tad higher on one. That could also be the plaster cast or even the photography making it look that way. I am no expert. just throwing it out as something that struck me.

Virgil

[marylannin]

I believe it is the same coin. The plaster case in not ideal in this circumstance; notably the right handle of the amphora is clogged and not clear as represented in the photo.

M

[Kevin D]

To my eyes, the E look the same. They really must be, as it does seem certain that the dies are the same (I see the same die break on both images, above the top of the right amphora handle).

For me, the biggest difference is seen in the reverse edge, around 5-8. However, I have coins that are pictured in catalogs from the 'plaster cast era', where there is 'flashing' on the edge of the cast in places. On the coin in this thread, the lighting and/or angle of photography could be causing this as well. I would be surprised if this turned out to be two different coins. I suspect the hard copy of this catalog (or an excellent high resolution scan of it) would prove it is the same coin.